What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal directed the assessee to file an application for condonation of delay before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) was instructed to consider this application liberally and decide the appeal on its merits after providing an opportunity to be heard.

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 95 days. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to this delay, as no application for condonation was filed. The assessee argued for condonation of delay, citing sufficient cause.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay without considering the sufficiency of cause for condonation. The importance of liberal interpretation for condoning delay when sufficient cause is shown.

Leela Sethia vs ITO | s.250 | ITAT Kolkata 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH,

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR

For Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Hearing: 17.06.2026Pronounced: 19.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.3067/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16

Leela Sethia Vs. ITO, Ward-33(1), Kolkata 5, Russel Street, Kolkata-700071 [PAN: AIZPS9796A] APPELLANT RESPONDENT

Appellant by : Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR Respondent by : Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Date of hearing : 17.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 19.06.2026 O R D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER This Appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (Appeal) [“the Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 12.11.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, an Assessment Order came to be passed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 27.12.2017 by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 27.12.2017, Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide

ITA No.3067/Kol/2025 Leela Sethia.; A.Y: 2015-16 order dated 12.11.2025, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee on delay in latches.

The Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that there was sufficient cause to condoning the delay of 95 days, however, the Ld. CIT(A) committed an error in not condoning the delay in filing the Appeal and dismissed the first Appeal. Thus, sought for allowing the present Appeal.

Per contra, the Ld. DR vehemently submitted that Assessee has not found any application for to condone the inordinate delay of 95 days in filing the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the Appeal of the assessee on delay in latches.Thus, sought for dismissal of the present Appeal.

We have heard the parties and perused the material. We find that the assessee filed the first appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 95 days. The assessee has not filed any application for condonation of delay, therefore, Appeal of the Assessee has been dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A).

It is expected from the assessee to file the Appeal on time, if the cause for delay is bona- fide and beyond the control of the assessee, the same can be construed as sufficient cause which has to be explained in the Application for condonation of delay in filing the Page | 2

ITA No.3067/Kol/2025 Leela Sethia.; A.Y: 2015-16 Appeal. The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again clarified that the delay in filing the Appeal with sufficient cause should be looked into in a liberal way and shall condone the delay. In the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji& Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court settled the law that the delay when supported by justifiable reasons, must make way for the cause of substantial justice.

Considering the above facts and circumstances, we direct the Assessee to file application for condonation of delay before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) is directed to consider the same liberally and decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 19.06.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAKESH MISHRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 19.06.2026 DP, PS

ITA No.3067/Kol/2025 Leela Sethia.; A.Y: 2015-16

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //TRUE COPY//

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA

LEELA SETHIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 33(1),, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Latest GST High Court judgments